There's one week left till the November election! Abe and Joe recap the local ballot, bring you up to speed on the national picture, and generally tell you everything you need to know. Except whom to vote for. That's up to you.

This Thanksgiving, there is so much to be thankful for, even in this time of hungry ghosts. The American people have awakened, and a Movement is afoot. Abe and Joe give thanks for the Occupaction, and take your calls.

Voters in Mississippi will decide tomorrow on a 'personhood' initiative which, if passed, would confer legal personhood upon a fertilized ovum. This would of course render abortion illegal, and any other act that interfered with said ovum's development -- like, say, a miscarriage, or the use of certain kinds of birth control -- could be considered negligent homicide or even murder.

Thus do the War on Sex, and the War to Put Women Back In Their Place, continue. Abe and Joe examine the situation and take your phone calls.

Joe reports on the popular Occupy Portland encampment, including phone calls from Sandy Polishuk, one of our Elder Activists working on-site in whatever capacity seems appropriate at the time, and from Jimmy, one of the Volunteer Coordinators.

There is a Volunteer Tent in the Encampment, with "Needs" posted prominently for anyone with some time to see. Lately, they've been needing laundry services. Do help if you can.

Comments

I guess we should be proud that "right-wingers" (DOD-CIA infiltrators?) are trolling our groovy little radio station, but I am seriously disturbed that, a) they seem to prefer Abe, and b) Abe encourages them. I was grossed out when Abe was guffawing along with the redneck who called all the people who don't like fireworks "sissies". As April said: "Really, Abe? Really?"

I don't hold high hopes for Abe's political sophistication. My suspicions were confirmed about a year ago when he admitted to his sycophantic Obama loyalty and promised his audience that he'd learned his lesson, but the very next week was back to being an apologist. His (and yes, Joe's, too) show reminds me of Air America more than anything. If it inspires people to call and share their true feelings, deep, dark secrets, or just try for shock, that's fine, but the KBOO community generally prefers higher culture and more diversity. If listeners like the format (and Abe and Joe get high ratings), perhaps KBOO can offer training to producers on how to dissect destructive calls, so they don't usurp the entire show.

Abe consistently refered to his call-in comments as a "score" between FOR or AGAINST fireworks, another thing that struck me as a chauvenistic, even infantile. There was no room for compromise, ideas or suggestions about alternatives (eg. allow only certified operators to use them, as in many states; limit firework celebrations to once a year, like January 1, to share with most of the world in solidarity, oversight, and safer climate conditions in the northern hemisphere). There was no real in-depth exploration into the symbolism of fireworks for weaponry,, war and reflection, the history of fireworks production around the world, the distraction from the actual celebration, the various psychological reactions to fireworks (male/female, old/young, dog/cat, sensitive/reckless), the deaths and accidents, the forest fires, the air quality such that you have to keep your children indoors the next day, the authorities having to issue warnings, bans or.monitor sales and possession.. There was SO much more that could have been covered, but Abe was concerned with 'the score' and forcing us all into a dichotomy . It would work better if Abe and Joe would invite a guest to deflect their cynic/hopeful Democratic parlance and introduce listeners to new perspectives. As it is, callers have a good idea about how Joe&Abe react to topics. It's no surprise to me why women don't call. Why bother when you're not heard, or worse, objectified for entertainment?

had i been encouraged to call, I might have shared this antecdote:

Me, personally, I'm from Arizona, and I like to know that our house won't burn down when professionals handle the pretty pyrotechnics. The boom boom morons have filled my neighborhoods since I moved to Portland and three years ago I got hit, twice, by street amateurs' cheap thrills. I no longer dare walk or ride around in the week surrounding this holiday. I used to have an ambivalent, but accepting approach to this holiday when I was young because we'd meet with lots of friends and family and go to the Pow-wow and have tail-gate picnics. I found it bizarre to be on Indian reservations on Independence Day, and was never impressed by fireworks, but because many of my family were, I tolerated it. I felt a connection. I can't tolerate the morons who have hijacked tradition simply because they get off on things that go boom and explode.

I listen every once in awhile on tues mornings. I don't usually turn it on till driving to work around 8:30am. I really tried to get through this morning. You asked the second to the last caller (who hung up before answering) "who are the left wing demogogs?" Well I'd have to say you two are a couple of them. And this is why I say that. After the caller before him was finished you both went on a 3 minute rant characterizing everyone who is against Obamacare as a racist or scared of losing their "white male" privledges. Not to say there are those on the right who aren't racist but I would bet it is not the majority of them. You do a disservice to the debate by calling those that disagree with your opinion racists. Just as the right does a disservice to the discussion when they call those who disagree with them socialists. Our country was founded on debate and to assume you know someone's motives simply because they disagree with your opinion is the height of arrogance. Some of the harshest words directed at Obama I heard on your station were made by the American Indian from the Lakota Tribe (can't remember his name) that was on the other evening (also don't remember the date). Is he a racist?

My problem with this healthcare reform is not that it is proposed by our first mixed race president but because before the bills were even written congress exempted themselves from it. If something is not going to be mandatory then there is no reason for an exemption. My other problem with it is that any reforms will not happen until 2012 so why are they trying to rush it through without a full disclosure of the contents. We were promised transparency by this administration and we are not getting it. "No bill to be voted on until it is made available to the public for 7 days."

Hello,
The show will usually host phone calls from neurotic wing-nut ultra-conservatives under the guise that since they called then they should have their say.
Often these mentally unbalanced bozos will get three to five minutes of on-the-air phone time in order that the host can use their rambling creepy rants to discredit all conservatives.

Please, Abe, stop doing this. When they call, aggressively get rid of them quickly. We really don't want to hear them on the air. Please, just skoot them off after 20 or so seconds. Again, we don't want to hear them or hear you 'toying' with them.

These people are mentally unbalanced. They are not representative of "loyal conservative opposition". They are just unpleasant and stupid. They are bad radio. They disrupt the flow of your show. Their neurotic banter forces you to go on the defensive and a host should never go on the defensive on his own phone-in radio show. They don't belong on your show for three to five minutes.

I listen every week and hope and pray that several right wing calls come in. I think they are quite representative of the conservative mindset. These calls remind us why the right wing is the worse of two evils. Democrats may be irritating and disappointing, but Republicans and conservatives are dangerous and disturbing.

I was inspired to think because of your show on guns, and consider that a high compliment. So this for you, both:

Bat and Gun
(for Joe Uris and Abe Proctor)

The baseball bat just lies there
Waiting to act upon
The baseball bat just waits there
Unable to become
Until, that is, it’s wielded
On a ball or on someone.

The gun’s locked up tightly
Ammunition too
The gun waits quietly
Wondering what to do
Will it be fired
At some thing, or at someone, who

Says that bat and gun
Just dead objects are
Who says bat and gun
Neither toy nor weapon are
Who says people, not weapons, kill people
People, the problem; guns and bats, not at all.

But (you know) there is some difference
‘tween wooden bat, mechanical gun
There is indeed some difference
in swingin’ a bat, pointin’ a gun
It’s in the wielder
His strength and his aim:

(You see), the bat’s swung strong and precise
Or, of weak and clumsy stroke
And the gun is aimed at target,
On or off the mark
But even if that gunman, profoundly weak should be
The gun’s still strong, still can kill, or maim, effectively.

It all comes down to this
(the gap ‘tween bat and gun),
That with a bat it’s harder,
But easier with the gun
To destroy or maim a target:
An object or someone.

Guns enable distant slaughter
And those close-up killing sprees
(That’s why gunman and soldier a trigger prefer to squeeze)
The suicide, too, wants gun not bat,
To avoid the trouble and pain
Of whacking himself, again and again, and again and again and again.

Getting a bat is easy and cheap
Yet, with bats, few people kill
Getting a bat is easy and cheap,
Yet, by bats, few people die.
Because guns kill much better,
It’s on guns killers can rely.

When we all get guns we’ll all be safe
Some hope, and more believe,
Yeah man, when we’ve all got weapons
We’ll all have somethin’ up our sleeve
And we’ll outnumber the killers
We’ll kill them without police,

That is unless the gunman
Knows he’ll face attack
Unless the knowing gunman
Plans before combat
To kill those armed civilians
With better guns, not bats.

Your show is my favorite, that's why I'm one of your nuisance callers. Concerning your show of April 7th: Discaharge of high powered firearms always risks unintended collateral damage, such as innocent bystanders. My guess is that enthusiasm for owning them would be greatly reduced if the law emphasized that the user, no matter the circumstances (self defence, etc.) would be criminally liable for harm to bystanders and damage to property.

Nah... You'll never curb Amerikan enthusiasm for destructive toys. We already have plenty of laws on the books that make gun wielders criminally liable for harm to bystanders and damage to property. For instance, if you shoot at a robber but kill your neighbor instead, you are most likely up for negligent homicide, at a minimum.

How come both of you Abe/Joe do not talk about taking an oath to uphold the Constitution and it being violated by the very president who was born in Mombaba, Kenya. He was not born in Hawaii. The president will never support the will of the people!!!!!!!

(sorry if I'm posting on your blog too often- I just posted about 5 min. ago)

Anyway, I want to have this link posted:

www.opensecrets.org/news/2009/03/before-the-fall-aig-payouts-we.html

(this describes the massive contributions AIG has made to federal politicians, with even more going to Dems than GOP. With a whole lot going to Chris Dodd, who's overseeing the bailout of AIG. And also how John Kerry happens to own $2 mil. AIG stock).

Hope I don't call your show too often; I realize Joe is asking for female callers.

And, not sure I succinctly expressed the concern that the US gov't has decided it is its responsibilty to cover the credit-default swap bets ("insurance") that the financial institutions have entered into to the tune of $60 trillion.

Joe, you brought up the point of China's concern over the $1 trillion it has lent to the U.S.- but, wouldn't the U.S. be much more apt to be able to cover the foreign debt which our federal gov't has incurred if it didn't at the same time try to cover the credit-default swaps (CDS)? Perhaps China is concerned about its US Treasury bonds *because* the feds have decided to cover CDS?

And, Joe, you brought up the example of Sweden having bailed out its private banks. I don't know that much about the Swedish situation- my question about it would be: were the situations similar- were the Swedish banks similarly overextended, based on having bet on derivatives?

I suggested a radical solution (gov't just starting its own banks, to provide credit at low rates, and letting the private institutions die). Of course there's no political currency among US politicians for such a solution. But, as we continue to try to pay for the CDS, which provides no assurance that we'll get to the point that the private banks begin lending again; and, because my plan of having the gov't start anew, rather than trying to cover trillions of dollars in CDS, would be far less expensive, who has the better idea?

I understand that the monipulators of this world have their man in the presidency, but what I don't understand is why do we allow these monipulators violate the Constitution concerning the guide lines of who is allowed to be a president. Obama, born in Mombosa, Kenya Aug. 4, 1961. Sarah Obama's own parternal grandmother has vouched for that. We know his father's name is Lolo Soetoro, M.A. Second, Obama is listed as Indonesian citizen born, religion is Islamic. His claim that he was born in Hawaii is a bold face lie!!!! In fact Ambassador Peter Nicholas Rateng' Oginga Ogego, on WRIF 101 FM "Mike in the Morning" and co-host Trudy, came right out and made a statement that Obama was born in Mombosa, Kenya. Now the Ambassador is in hot water over that statement. Also, Obama is from the same Muslim tribe, the Luo Tribe, the same as his his COUSIN Mr. Odinga, a MARXIST, for whom he campaigned heavily for when Odinga was running for office. Let's talk about the Constitution!!!
Does president Barack HUSSEIN Obama do the bidding of the monipulators of the elite??? Any law he puts forthe is null and void on standing!!!!! I think the United States is infor a BAD TIME because Obama does not have the interest of the people! What ever face he puts on it's just a masquerade to fool the masses.

I recently heard the argument that the pay differential between men and women is actually fair. This idea is based on the situation of women living longer than men but work the same period of time. This argument claims that the total difference of pay between men and women equals the cost of additional medical care spent for women in their senior years.

For example, let's say a man and a woman work the same number of years (about 40), in the same job with the same responsibilities, and the man makes 10% more than the woman. Say that the job pays (in constant dollars) an average of $30,000 over the forty years. The man makes $1.2 million over this period and the woman makes $1.08 million.

The difference is $120,000. Now at age 60, a man will generally live to be 75 and a woman will live to be 85. Most medical expenses are incurred in the last ten years of live. These costs are paid mostly by public funds through MediCare. The Pay_Inequality_is_Fair argument holds that this $120,000 pay differential is used by society to pay the additional medical expenses that women use and men don't.
Unequal pay for equal work would be unfair if men and women had the same lifespan, but they don't.

I realize that this argument will float like a lead zeppelin in the KBOO community. However, you may want to be aware of it so you don't get blindsided by it in a public debate on this issue.

Suppose the theory is true, and women do cost more in terms of Social Security and Medicare, wouldn't it be a good idea if they had the opportunity to pay more money into the system? A women working full time over her career would have more money deducted in taxes, social security, medicare, etc. Wouldn't that be a really good argument for increasing her pay? if she earns more, she can pay more, and she can contribute more to retirement, health insurance plans etc. It sounds to me like that's a strong argument to pay women 20-30% more than a man with equal experience etc. (grin)

Now wait a minute, I’m supposed to believe that the flap over the cartoon (depicting the police shooting of the rampaging chimp, with caption implying association of the chimp with Obama) published in the New York Post, February 18 edition, wasn’t a deliberately planned outcome? That something so blatant could have escaped being understood by the editors as precipitating acrimonious riffs within the public? What?????

OK, get your tin foil hats on, because here’s my contention about why it was published. Is anyone going to argue that the American citizenry isn’t suffering anxious doubt about its government no longer serving its interests, but instead is now serving transnational interests of exclusive and private benefit? If government has been so hijacked, doesn’t it go to reason that the hijackers would want to make sure that the citizenry are kept distracted by tangential issues that serve to keep them divided among themselves?

So divided, what chance is there that we'll meld together in sufficient force to take back our government for the common good?

No, I’m not denying that racism persist in America. To the contrary, I believe it is so much a shaping part of our national history that it will continue to reverberate through our national conscience for generations to come, disposing all of us, no matter our race, to sense it being practiced in all directions. Taking my own life experience as example: I’m an old white guy, and though I’ve paid some dues fighting against racism in my generation I now often feel I am targeted by some Blacks with the same type of demeaning generalizations about “whiteness” as were openly applied by Caucasians to Blacks when I was young and against which I protested.

That’s my point about the cartoon. Am I the only one who sees it as that old familiar ploy for distracting the public with feint of hand movement that disguises the bigger issue of our sovereign independence (as a democratic nation) being pulled right out from under us by international financiers?????

Let me recall for you another similar feint of hand executed in concealing the US State Department’s real purpose in backing the establishing of the state of Israel – disinheriting the native Palestinians, of course. Consider how deftly and poisonously was quelled public resistance to such backing by labeling all opposition as anti-Semite. Then again, how many times over was the same feint of hand used during the cold war by invoking the phrase “soft on communism” anytime need was seen to quell objection against Pax Americana imperialism?

Hi Abe and Joe: Hey, have you guys ever thought of combining your names and just calling it the 'Jobe' show? You do wander the desert sometimes when on the air!

Seriously, thought it would be great if you honored Abe lincoln's b-day (feb. 12) on your 2/10 show. It would be appropriate to read this, his words, on air, considering that what he prophesied has come true:

" I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country...corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the republic is destroyed."

Now that's what I call Disaster Capitalism. He had a right to tremble when one thinks of his ultimate fate.

This might be a good time to try to get a constitutional amendment to remove business’s from participating in the government because that’s what is really causing our problems. The government should be ran by the citizen's, not business’s.

I'm a somewhat professional feminist (published book, essays, poetry, & lectures) from the Second Wave 60s, & when I heard of Sarah Palin's
appointment as McCain's VP, my First Words were: "She's the Christian
Fundy Neocon American 4th Reich WETDREAM!"
The person who complained about the "sexism" or "gender-bias" embedded in such epithets made authentic points, familiar to all of us.
All the serious, elaborate linguistic critique & definition she expressed is really gonna fit on a campaign button or bumpersticker, uh huh.
Political Correctness takes all the energy out of political speech (that's
one reason Democrats keep losing).
Political discourse is not intellectual discourse. This election is not a lecture hall, it's a boxing arena. Witty word jabs! Wicked linguistic punches! Jab! Punch! One to the gut one to the brain!
(By the way, boxing originated in matrifocal Crete, with both
females & males taking part.)
Fighting hard is not fighting dirty, & fighting words (especially when
they encode the truth in brilliant epithets) are an ancient rhetorical
art.
You Go, Guys!!!!

Enough already. Welcome to the launch of the new Abe and Joe Show blog. Writing a blog as a sort of addendum to the radio show is something I've been kicking around for awhile, so here we go.

This blog will complement the show in that it will give listeners someplace to go to look at the source material I cite on the air, as well as the opportunity to bone up prior to Tuesday morning -- I plan to submit a reading list of articles, quotes, citations, etc. from which each week's show (at least from my perspective) grows.

But I want the blog to be able to stand alone on its own merits as a work of commentary and analysis. We'll see how that goes ...

I'll be writing about the topics we discuss on the show, of course, and taking advantage of the blogosphere's remarkable capacity to direct traffic instantly to other sites where like-minded people congregate, all participating in this new sort of organic intellectual dynamism that's going on. I'm of the opinion that the Internet, in political terms, is a development on the order of the Gutenberg printing press. More on that later.

And soccer. I'll write about soccer too.

In any event, welcome. Thank you all for your continuing support of the show, and I hope you enjoy this online addition.

We spoke at the end of your show on Tuesday 5/20/08. I'm forwarding some resources you might consider checking out regarding the issue of whether 9/11 was a False Flag operation or a Terrorist Attack. At first I didn't quite understand your question 'why does it matter if there were bombs in the buildings'

Well, bombs in the buildings means it was planned ahead of time, which means another party was responsible for the attacks, and that it was likely a false flag event rather than a terrorist attack. That's a pretty big difference and one I imagine you'd appreciate. If you dig in to the well-documented books on the issue listed below, you'll find there is overwhelming evidence that the CIA, Mossad, and ISI (Pakistani intelligence) were the main culprits, and that the hijackers were trained in some cases at US facilities. Why it matters is that these culprits won't be leaving the US government when Bush retires to Crawford. So you can expect more false flag events like 9/11 unless we bring the original perpetrators to justice.

Also on the statement that "we can never really know what happened"...
That's 100% wrong. One way to know whether the buildings were brought down by explosives (false flag event rather than terror attack) is to analyze the dust for the combusion by-products of thermate. This has been done. Guess what they found. Thermate:
http://www.bollyn.com/index/?id=10714

Google "WTC Building 7" on google video to watch how Building 7 fell. It's obviously a controlled demolition. Buildings just don't collapse accordian-style at free-fall speed due to a few isolated fires. The US Govt's National Institute for Standards and Technology which was tasked with explaining the collapse of Building 7 agrees that the explanation that fire caused the collapse is "remote". They have not explained the collapse after 7 years of study.

You'll find some interesting commentary on bin Laden's supposed "confessions" and the obviously faked videos released before the 2004 election at this link:

You also might find it interesting that bin Laden has never been indicted for the 9/11 attacks:

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/laden.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden

If you'd like to develop a more informed opinion on the issue, read these books (all at the library):

Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory by David Ray Griffin (This book addresses those supposed "conspiracy debunking" engineering explanations you mentioned)

Armed Madhouse, by Greg Palast

The Terror Conspiracy: Deception, 9/11 and the Loss of Liberty by Jim Marrs

The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions And Distortions by David Ray Griffin

Watch These Videos (all on google video)

Loose Change Final Cut

In Plane Site

September Clues

Ring of Power

Zeitgeist

Endgame

Terrorstorm

Check out these websites (or just google "9/11 Truth"):

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:
http://www.ae911truth.org

http://whatreallyhappened.com

http://www.911truth.org

If we as a people refuse to demand truth and justice on a matter this grave, we will deserve our leaders' contempt and embolden them to further treachery. We have to stand up and draw the line somewhere or we can kiss our hopes for security, solvency and democracy goodbye.

I hope you take this issue seriously enough to look at these resources. I've been enjoying your show for years!

I just wanted to ad to the may day program discussion. It was suggested by either Joe or Abe that plummeting wages in the building trades could be overcome through unionization which would require laborers to demonstrate a certain level of competence and would also require employers to pay fair wages. It was also suggested that we should hold employers accountable for hiring un-papered workers rather than just going after the workers. I agree with both of these suggestions but I feel a better and more complete way to deal with the problem would be to focus on how we as consumers spend our money. This was also brought up in the show but I don't think it was highlighted strongly enough, probably because of time constraints.

Let me relate a brief experience I had washing windows at the house of a union carpenter. They scheduled their windows to be done and told me they didn't need a bid beforehand. I showed up the day of the job with my crew and when I looked at the house, I told the home-owner how much it would be just so there were no surprises. She felt it was too much so we ended up not doing the job. She called me the next day and offered a smaller amount if I would come back and do it. I have a hard time saying no so I decided I would just go do it myself, that way I could keep my labor costs down. (Yes, I realize I shouldn't have) While I was doing the job, we were talking and she was a very pleasant person and I truly enjoyed the conversation. After a while, she mentioned that her husband has to drive to Portland every day because he is a union carpenter. She didn't like the extra time that took him away from the family but she said it was worth it because he is paid very well and he also got excellent benefits and retirement. I'm not sure exactly how much he makes but I heard union carpenters can make up to $50/hr plus all the benefits and retirement. I think she said he had been with the union for 20 years so he is definitely up in the pay-scale.

Let me start making my point. I ended up making about $25/hr just counting the time I was there working and before expenses. Her comment was "Oh, you ended up doing all right on this job". She wasn't thinking about the time it took the first time we showed up at the house. There were three of us there so if you include drive time, it took us 1.5 man hours just to be turned away. I have to pay my guys weather we are working or not so it cost me an hour of wages (i'm not counting my half hour). I was paying my guys a minimum $15/hr plus a percentage of the jobs we did. Workman's comp is 5% of payroll and payroll tax is 25%. Do the math and you come up with just under $40. I ended up doing the job for $150 so that means I actually grossed $110 on the job. I had workman's comp on myself plus I pay self-employment tax, insurance, gas, advertising and supplies. I also have to factor in bookkeeping time as well as the time it takes to go buy supplies. You get the picture.

We also talked about their experience building their home. She was complaining that she could not find anybody to paint her house for less than $20/hr. I used to be a construction contractor so I mentioned to her all the costs involved with maintaining a license, advertising, workman's comp. etc. She then told me "No, these were just" and i'm pretty sure she was going to say mexicans but then caught herself and said " people working on their own" i.e. not licensed contractors. Regardless of if they were or were not legally in this country or if they were or were not white, you do see where I am going with this story, right? Let me remind you this guy is a union carpenter. So even if we unionize the trades, we need to change our mindset as a community about how we spend our money. When we buy from companies that pay poorly or choose to use cheap labor, we are the ones responsible for perpetuating the problem.

The giant corporations that we like to blame will respond to changes in the market. If we refuse to buy from companies that do not provide quality health insurance, within one fiscal quarter every major corporation out there will be sure that every employee has a wonderful policy. If we refuse to buy from or invest in companies whose CEO's make 100 times the average wage of their workers, the boards will adjust the CEO's compensation. If we refuse to fly on airlines that cut wages and retirement, they won't do it. Let's not blame all the other "ignorant Americans" because what I am saying is not something the majority of us don't already know, we just want to save money. We want to save money because our wages are low but we can make the situation worse by not spending our money wisely.

We can make good choices by:

1) Buying quality products and services only from companies that we would love to work for.
2) Be willing to spend a little more on food. Don't the guys that grow and pick our food deserve a good wage? Many small ranches and farms take better care of their employees, better care of their animals, better care of the land. We can spend a little time to seek out the companies that do well and pay a little more for their product.
3) Stop creating such a demand for oil. This one has many effects on our economy which I'm sure we are all aware of. However, it seems we need to think about it a little more and act.
4) Why are we jealous of working class "uneducated" people who have well-paying jobs? Eating out is a luxury. Tip the waitress. I know some waitresses that make over $40,000 a year but like I said, eating out is a luxury, if we can afford to eat at a restaurant, we can afford to tip well. A good mechanic has experience which would correlate to years of schooling. Why do we complain when we see transmission specialists making $100,000/ year? As a working class, let's protect the few well-paying jobs we have left and demand more through our spending habits.
5) Pay off our credit card balances monthly or just pay cash for everything, save up for a car instead of making payments, and let's educate ourselves before jumping into a $400,000 mortgage. These things just distribute the wealth on up the ladder to the super-rich. I realize banks should bear the main responsibility of serving their clients' best interest but they don't do it so we need to educate ourselves.
6) If we are business owners, obviously we would want to follow through with our principles in the way we run our business. Sometimes that means charging more than others do in order to pay our employees well or it might mean simply taking less profits or cutting our salary. Would we want to work as an employee at our business?

I say we in this comment (which is starting to look a little more like an essay, but I promise I'm almost done) because I don't always follow all these guidelines. I undercharged for the first four years I was self-employed and so ended up with a sizeable credit card debt. When I'm completely broke, I buy whatever food is on sale regardless of where it was grown. But if we all at least keep these things in mind and make an effort to follow them whenever possible, we can hopefully make life a little better for the working class. If not, we can at least have a clear conscience and say that we are not a part of the problem.

I only caught the last 15 minutes or so of your program, but a couple of things you said regarding Governor Spitzer caught my attention:

1. You raised the question as to why a Democrat was being investigated by the Feds while a Republican lawmaker in Louisiana caught in a similar situation was only investigated by state authorities. Spitzer's involvement with a prosecution ring was discovered as the result of an IRS inquiry into money transfers going into shell companies. Once they discovered that Spitzer was involved, they were required by law to inform the FBI who in turn started investigating whether these transfers by Spitzer involved bribery or other abuse of his official position.

2. You suggested that this an American tempest in a teapot that other countries don't consider of importance. This wasn't the case of a drunk conventioneer picking up a hooker on the spur of the moment. The highest elected official of the state engaged in a long and deliberate transaction with an organized crime ring.

3. You suggested that somehow it made a difference that this was a high-priced callgirl rather than a street walker and went on to say that such callgirls are free agents rather than exploited victims. I have to admit this one really appalled me. In the 13 years I was a private investigator, I never ran into one case of a "Julia Roberts-Pretty Woman" in the sex trade. Whether they were plying their business on 82nd Avenue or being marketed to a higher clientele through "escort" services or other front operations, none of these women were independent nor were they realizing more than a fraction of the money they made. The controls may have been more subtle on those working the higher end, but they were being controlled and manipulated at great and often-times long-lasting psychological and physical cost.